I have seen that in several books and calculators the following: -22 = -4. There are teachers who seem to think the same.
I can understand that in calcs or C... this is done due input limitations (no negative digits keys).
Some Casio calculators even have two minus symbols ("-" and a shorter "·"), one for sign, but when calculating ·22 the result is -4.
If when calculating -22 it is going to be separated whimsically into "- | 2", -22 = -1 * 22
>x = -2 then, x2 = -4
So I can do the same in 12, "1 | 2"
Therefore 122 = 1 * 22 = 4 and (12)2 = 144.
Both are absurd.
>In Excel / Calc: -22 = 4, it looks like someone correctly implemented something AS BASIC AS NEGATIVE INTEGERS.
>Normally negative integers are entered as a positive integer and negative unary. In that case there may be ambiguity in the order of "-" and "^ 2"
I can understand that in calcs or C... this is done due input limitations (no negative digits keys).
Some Casio calculators even have two minus symbols ("-" and a shorter "·"), one for sign, but when calculating ·22 the result is -4.
If when calculating -22 it is going to be separated whimsically into "- | 2", -22 = -1 * 22
>x = -2 then, x2 = -4
So I can do the same in 12, "1 | 2"
Therefore 122 = 1 * 22 = 4 and (12)2 = 144.
Both are absurd.
>In Excel / Calc: -22 = 4, it looks like someone correctly implemented something AS BASIC AS NEGATIVE INTEGERS.
>Normally negative integers are entered as a positive integer and negative unary. In that case there may be ambiguity in the order of "-" and "^ 2"
